The Volatility Paradox |
Conventional wisdom holds that Benjamin Netanyahu should feel most comfortable when Republicans occupy the White House and most constrained when Democrats do. For decades, observers have assumed that the Israeli right enjoys a natural affinity with Republican administrations, while Democratic presidents represent a more difficult and demanding interlocutor.
Yet this familiar narrative obscures a deeper paradox. Netanyahu has often appeared more willing to challenge Barack Obama and Joe Biden publicly than he has been Donald Trump. The reason lies not in ideological proximity but in differing conceptions of power, loyalty, and predictability.
The paradox is simple: a predictable critic may be easier to manage than an unpredictable friend.
Throughout his political career, Netanyahu has demonstrated a remarkable ability to navigate relationships with American presidents. He has often disagreed sharply with Democratic administrations over settlements, Iran, Palestinian statehood, and the conduct of military operations. These disagreements were frequently public and occasionally acrimonious.
The most striking example occurred in March 2015, when Netanyahu bypassed the Obama administration and accepted an invitation from Republican Speaker of the House John Boehner to address a joint session of Congress without prior consultation with the White House. The speech constituted an extraordinary breach of diplomatic protocol. Traditionally, foreign leaders coordinate such visits with the sitting administration, especially when addressing Congress on matters central to American foreign policy. Netanyahu’s decision was widely perceived as a direct challenge to President Barack Obama and an unprecedented intervention in a contentious domestic policy debate.
The purpose of the speech was to mobilise congressional and public opposition to the emerging Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), the nuclear agreement being negotiated between Iran and the P5 1 powers. Obama viewed the agreement as the cornerstone of his Middle East strategy. His administration argued that the JCPOA would significantly restrict Iran’s nuclear program, subject it to intrusive international inspections, and substantially lengthen the time required for Tehran to develop a nuclear weapon. For Obama, diplomacy offered the best available mechanism for preventing nuclear proliferation while avoiding another costly military conflict in the Middle East.
Netanyahu saw the agreement very........